Abstract
The present experiment was carried out to study the intercropping effect of green gram, black gram, soybean, groundnut and red gram with maize during kharif season of 2009 and 2010. Treatments consisted of sole crop of maize [rows spaced 60 cm apart (M1) and paired rows (30 cm apart) spaced at 90 cm apart (M2)], green gram (GG), black gram (BG), soybean (SB), groundnut (GN), and red gram (RG); intercropping of M1+GG, M1+BG, M1+SB, M1+GN and M1+RG with 1:1 and M2+2GG, M2+2BG, M2+2SB, M2+2GN and M2+2RG with 2:2 row proportions. Maize equivalent yield was always higher in all the intercropping situations as compared to pure stand yield of maize. The highest maize grain yield was obtained with maize + green gram intercropping (2783.11 kg ha-1) in 1:1. The highest maize equivalent yield was observed with maize + red gram (5270.46 kg ha-1) in 2:2 intercropping system. Values of land equivalent ratio, relative value total, relative net return and area time equivalent ratio were greater than unity and differed significantly in between both the groups of 1:1 and 2:2 proportions of intercropping. Highest gross and net return of Rs.55191.60 ha-1 and Rs.39950.30 ha-1 respectively was recorded in maize+red gram (2:2) intercropping. Key words: Intercropping, maize, land equivalent ratio, area time equivalent ratio, sowing ratio, monetary advantage, net return, equivalent yield, rainfed.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Maize equivalent yield was higher in all intercropping situations than the pure stand yield of maize.
- Treatment
- intercroppinge1
- Outcome
- Maize equivalent yielde1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- pure stand yield of maizee1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Maize equivalent yield was always higher in all the intercropping situations as compared to pure stand yield of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest maize grain yield, 2783.11 kg ha-1, came from maize + green gram intercropping in the 1:1 proportion.
- Treatment
- maize + green gram intercroppinge1
- Outcome
- maize grain yielde1
- Direction
- higheste1
- Value
- 2783.11 kg ha-1e1
- Qualifier
- 1:1e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The highest maize grain yield was obtained with maize + green gram intercropping (2783.11 kg ha-1) in 1:1”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest maize equivalent yield, 5270.46 kg ha-1, was observed with maize + red gram in the 2:2 intercropping system.
- Treatment
- maize + red grame1
- Outcome
- maize equivalent yielde1
- Direction
- higheste1
- Value
- 5270.46 kg ha-1e1
- Qualifier
- 2:2e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The highest maize equivalent yield was observed with maize + red gram (5270.46 kg ha-1) in 2:2 intercropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Land equivalent ratio and relative value total were greater than unity and differed significantly between the 1:1 and 2:2 proportions.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize-legume intercropping systems”
e1“Values of land equivalent ratio, relative value total, relative net return and area time equivalent ratio were greater than unity and differed significantly in between both the groups of 1:1 and 2:2 proportions of intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
Relative net return and area time equivalent ratio were greater than unity and differed significantly between the 1:1 and 2:2 proportions.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize-legume intercropping systems”
e1“Values of land equivalent ratio, relative value total, relative net return and area time equivalent ratio were greater than unity and differed significantly in between both the groups of 1:1 and 2:2 proportions of intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest gross return, Rs.55191.60 ha-1, was recorded in maize + red gram (2:2) intercropping.
- Treatment
- maize+red gram (2:2) intercroppinge1
- Outcome
- grosse1
- Direction
- Higheste1
- Value
- Rs.55191.60 ha-1e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Highest gross and net return of Rs.55191.60 ha-1 and Rs.39950.30 ha-1 respectively was recorded in maize+red gram (2:2) intercropping”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest net return, Rs.39950.30 ha-1, was recorded in maize + red gram (2:2) intercropping.
- Treatment
- maize+red gram (2:2) intercroppinge1
- Outcome
- net returne1
- Direction
- Higheste1
- Value
- Rs.39950.30 ha-1e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Highest gross and net return of Rs.55191.60 ha-1 and Rs.39950.30 ha-1 respectively was recorded in maize+red gram (2:2) intercropping”
The same questions in other papers
Vigna radiata var. radiata · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
612 papers in the same direction as this paper · 181 in the opposite direction · 40 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
830 papers more in this group
See all 834 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.